This past fall I trained pretty hard. Twice a day twice a week, once a day one or two other times a week, with easy days in between and at least one off day. Running, circuits, climbing, kettlebelling, biking, everything I enjoyed. I read gym jones and this forum and pushed myself hard. I kept a log and tried to take sensible amounts of rest.

This past month I had to move out of my apartment pretty quickly, and didn't have much time for training because of a longer commute. I still climb twice a week and try to get out for ice climbing every other weekend or so. But I haven't done a pull-up or a dead hang in about a month.

Yet, last week I sent 5.12 for the first time (on TR, at the gym, boohoo, whatevs). Yesterday I onsighted 5.12a (on TR, at the gym, boohoo, suck a hog).

I might be crazy. maybe this is just my body finally feeling the benefits of a lot of hard work. but I'm not feeling so compelled to get up at 5:00 for a cold morning workout. In fact I think I might just climb from now on, go running when I feel like it. maybe I'll never do another sit up.

OK, so I do want to stay in shape for the low-level alpine climbs that I want to do, so I might start getting up early again. But I'm interested to hear if anyone's had any similar experiences. Does it pay off to work out only, say, twice a week? Are rest days (i.e. do-nothing days) normally this beneficial?

I've made more rapid progress in the last 6 months (5.10b to 5.12a redpoints) than i have ever before, and i think the reason why is rest days. I'm climbing less often (twice a week on average, spread evenly) and doing much less actual training.

There is 5.12 and 5.12a @ climbing gyms? Please excuse my ignorance as I have only been to one climbing gym before (we are poor here in WV and as such are forced to climb real rock). I just wondered if the holds are labeled or something and you use some mathmatic formula to determine grade? P.s Train more Core!

So you were training hard, and taking time off allowed you to climb harder. Could it be that

a) you might have been overtraining and taking the time off allowed your body to recover.

or

b) that your body was getting stronger while you were training, but you didn't notice the pay off until recently

Even though you said that you tried to take "sensible amounts of rests", what one person needs may be very diffent then what another person may need. Even what one person may need may change over a period of time, or be dependent on your last workout. Whereas one person may take a day off and come back completely rested, another person may have to take several days off. Or after one specific workout, you may need to take multiple days off, whereas another workout, you may feel great after one rest day.

I'd say try training again (if you enjoy it) but make your rests longer and see if you can benefit.

You should easily be able to maintain your cardiovascular gains on 2 days per week.

Strength maintenance should require one day a week of maximal training.

do you have references for these

No, I just made it up, of course.

This is apparently what has been determined in studies of both aerobic and anaerobic training over the years. You can ask my prior professors of ex phys and strength training about specific study references, but I figure they did their legwork appropriately.

it all depends on how you define "training". a lot of strong climbers dont 'train' in the sense that you see it. clmbing at your max level (like 12a onsight for you) can be more effective then doing x number of sit-ups or deadhangs. a lot of climbers have a system set up that includes a period of muscular, aerobic, and aneorobic training (power workouts, circuits, laps on routes, four by fours, etc etc) followed by a period of max level performance (trying to redpoint or onsight your hardest). the training prepares you for improvement, but the period of max level climbing builds up your syke and pushes your body in newer, harder ways, allowing even more improvement. to me it seems like you're following this system - if not purposefully - and it probably explains your sudden improvements.

my advice to you is to do training cycles of 2-4 months, depending on what you have time for, and then when you feel you reach your peak do max level climbing until you feel like youre plateauing. then after that, 1-3 weeks of rest, depending on how worked you are, then time to start the cycle again!

This is apparently what has been determined in studies of both aerobic and anaerobic training over the years. You can ask my prior professors of ex phys and strength training about specific study references, but I figure they did their legwork appropriately.

i was hoping for a link, but ok. not saying i don't believe you, i would just like to read it.

Ufortunately, I have no links for you. Some things I rely on my education for since, as far as I was told at the time, my classroom lectures were based on empirical evidence.

Climbnkev wrote:

Could you give us an example of what this one training day might look like without charging a hundred dollars?

Well, my response wasn't ever meant to be one of "what" to do, rather only a response to the OP's question: "Does it pay off to work out only, say, twice a week?" Since strength and cardiovascular don't respond exactly the same, I simply tried to answer his question for both. He already has his own training plan.

Edited to add: the key to reducing one's aerobic training yet still maintain the same levels of fitness, you must only reduce either FREQUENCY or DURATION by 1/3 to 2/3 and you must keep your intensity absolutely the same as before, plus keep the other variable the same as well. Ergo:

Intensity (same) + Frequency (same) + Duration (less) OR

Intensity (same) + Frequency (less) + Duration (same)

= Maintenance (I also remember hearing that you can decrease both Freq and Dur by up to 2/3 simul and still not suffer losses, so, that may in fact be the actual case.)

BUT

Intensity (less) + Frequency (same) + Duration (same)

= Decreases in fitness

Likewise, resistance training requires MAXIMAL effort of all muscle groups to maintain existing strength on one day per week.

OK, so I do want to stay in shape for the low-level alpine climbs that I want to do, so I might start getting up early again. But I'm interested to hear if anyone's had any similar experiences. Does it pay off to work out only, say, twice a week? Are rest days (i.e. do-nothing days) normally this beneficial?

Don't worry. Some day, maybe soon, you'll be out climbing and despite you're best effort you'll find your self get shut down on a 5.10a, or equivalent grade of humiliation. After that, you'll find all the motivation you'll need to train. Or you'll be like all the other burnouts I've ever known, start Mt. biking, and never look back.

i mean, can ronnie coleman maintain his mass with one workout per week? seems like when you get that huge it might take more.

I said to maintain strength, not mass. There's a difference, and it's about maintaining the same level of neural recruitment.

An important note. In order to maintain strength, there has to be at least one session of maximal nueral recruitment per week( that is why 10-5's and 10-10's are so effective and BTW often used by body builders for both strength and mass maintenence,especcially during cutting phases)However I have found that with only one day a week it often leads to diminishing returns in the long run.Physiologies differ,but for me that is usually about 8-12 weeks.Then you have to start building again or at least put in an extra day.

it all depends on how you define "training". a lot of strong climbers dont 'train' in the sense that you see it. clmbing at your max level (like 12a onsight for you) can be more effective then doing x number of sit-ups or deadhangs. a lot of climbers have a system set up that includes a period of muscular, aerobic, and aneorobic training (power workouts, circuits, laps on routes, four by fours, etc etc) followed by a period of max level performance (trying to redpoint or onsight your hardest). the training prepares you for improvement, but the period of max level climbing builds up your syke and pushes your body in newer, harder ways, allowing even more improvement. to me it seems like you're following this system - if not purposefully - and it probably explains your sudden improvements.

my advice to you is to do training cycles of 2-4 months, depending on what you have time for, and then when you feel you reach your peak do max level climbing until you feel like youre plateauing. then after that, 1-3 weeks of rest, depending on how worked you are, then time to start the cycle again!

The most important thing to me is to love what I'm doing at all times, and in honesty I kinda like waking up at 5 to go running in the bitter cold (well, on some days). However I'm not interested in doing that if it has a limiting effect on my progress. I'll just keep on trying new things, so far as I'm loving every minute of it.

hEdited to add: the key to reducing one's aerobic training yet still maintain the same levels of fitness, you must only reduce either FREQUENCY or DURATION by 1/3 to 2/3 and you must keep your intensity absolutely the same as before, plus keep the other variable the same as well. Ergo:

Intensity (same) + Frequency (same) + Duration (less) OR

Intensity (same) + Frequency (less) + Duration (same)

= Maintenance (I also remember hearing that you can decrease both Freq and Dur by up to 2/3 simul and still not suffer losses, so, that may in fact be the actual case.)

BUT

Intensity (less) + Frequency (same) + Duration (same)

= Decreases in fitness

Likewise, resistance training requires MAXIMAL effort of all muscle groups to maintain existing strength on one day per week.

Something seems odd with this. I can decrease one of those three by 1/3 this week and then decrease one of the others by 1/3 next week, and so on and so on until eventually I think the series will end up with me only doing 1/3 of my initial workout but still having the same results. That would be great, but I don't buy it.